In all seriousness, the languages that are options are petty short. Typically when I've looked at hosting, outside of the (relatively expensive) ones that give you your own virtual server, you get to choose PHP or Perl. Possibly just PHP.
In April 2007, only hours after the Virginia Tech shooting (and before Seung-Hui Cho was actually identified), Thompson claimed that the shooter had trained on the game Counter-Strike.[38] According to Thompson, the game "drills you and gives you scenarios on how to kill them [and] gets you to kill them with your heart rate lower." He says that Seung-Hui "was in a hyper-reality situation in virtual reality." Though Seung-Hui had last been known to have played Counter-Strike in high school, four years prior to the shooting, Thompson asserts that "you don't drop it when you go to college, typically." Thompson claims that Seung-Hui's roommate's claim that Seung-Hui only used his computer to write fiction is incorrect because "Cho was able to go room to room calmly, efficiently, coolly killing people."[95] Prior to being identified, Thompson attributed the "flat effect[sic] on [Seung-Hui's] face" and the efficiency of his attack to video game rehearsals of the shooting.[96] However, a search warrant released, listing the items found in Cho's dorm room, did not contain any video games, and a Washington Post story cited by Thompson later removed a paragraph stating that Seung-Hui enjoyed violent video games in high school. Thompson continued to maintain that "this is not rocket science. When a kid who has never killed anyone in his life goes on a rampage and looks like the Terminator, he's a video gamer." Thompson also sent a letter to Bill Gates, saying, "Mr. Gates, your company is potentially legally liable (for) the harm done at Virginia Tech. Your game, a killing simulator, according to the news that used to be in the Post, trained him to enjoy killing and how to kill." However, Microsoft did not create Counter-Strike - they only published the Xbox version of the game.[38] It should be noted that the only game of note in the official report was "Sonic the Hedgehog". Seems to me his article is about normal for his behavior.., hell, what am I saying, Thompson would never even relize that that segment is targeting him.
(The quoted section is subject to the terms and condition of the GNU Free Documentation License)
Total cost for a band to produce their own record (minus manufacturing costs) is about six grand, assuming they now how to edit the tracks. (I'll assume they can play the instruments too) is about 6 grand. More if nobody has a spare basement. That 6 grand gets you an entire *recording studio* these days. Sound proofing, mikes, instruments, computers and software. (This figure comes from having asked an artist I listen to).
Screw hunting for drivers, most OEMs will coallate all the drivers for you on their website. But how many people even know they need chipset drivers? or that certain sound cards don't work if you don't install the modem drivers first (assuming you have one)? Then of course you have to factor in that the OEMs have to add software so that you can watch DVDs (unless you shelled out the extra money for Vista Premium). And god forbid you're on XP, and can't even get online to get the drivers until you have your network driver installed (Vista is nicer about that fortunately).
Windows is definitely *not* consumer ready in unbundled form.
The sad thing is, efficient power supplies are a really marginal cost increase compared to the whole system. (My 375 Watt 80% efficient one cost me $60, including shipping). But since every OEM in existence insists on spending the absolute minimum on power supplies, you get lousy 60% efficiency, and a lot of blown power supplies.
The biggest thing I see between the expensive Cisco stuff and the cheap WRT stuff (once you flash the firmware, and thank god for the GPL, cause the original stuff sucked), is that the Cisco kit will support large gigabit networks, (And you can get older Cisco branded stuff at Linksys prices that doesn't if you shop the right channels).
Assuming you only need 100Mbit though (which is fine for lower tiered subnets), Well... there are three systems hooked up to my WRT54GL, and it's running at about 10% of capacity. I could probably squeeze a bit more out of it by turning the wireless of, but still wouldn't want to put more than 25 or so machines on it. And if those machines do anything fancy with the network, I might want to drop that even further.s-
I've yet to find a political blog that isn't just cut and paste of some Party platform or ideological manifesto or just flat out kookery. And I'm FAR from a prude, but you have the word "fuck" seventeen times in your first paragraph, I'm not going to take you very seriously. So create your own, I did. (well, technically mine was (it's quite gone now) a copy of the party platform, but since I'm the only one in the party, I think it counts for your purposes).
Of course, getting attention for a blog that doesn't follow a party/pre-existing ideology is rather hard. Since you have no way to get the existing party line blogs to link to you, which I think is a big part of what the problem the book describes is. Noy only is it going to be near impossible to come across different (and not I say different, not opposing or moderate, politics is not a one dimensional equation) viewpoint, it's going to be extremely difficult to find one if you actively try.
In the article he says he launched the GNU OS in 1984 and seven years later a kid from Finland blows right past him. What was Stallman doing during those seven years? Building the other 80%* of the operating system that made up the first Gnu/Linux distro.
*This figure is complete BS, and used solely to indicate a point that Linus's work would have been useless without Stallman's.
Two problems with the idea that this is 'necessary for backwards computability'
One: The single biggest issue with OOXML is not any technical aspect, but rather the documentation, with frequently says something along the lines of 'do this the way this particular, undocumented format did it.' Which means that ultimately, nobody but MS can impliment it, *APPLE* has tried, they cannot save the files, and can read them badly, this actually puts them *behind* where OpenOffice is with the older.doc formats, since I can both read those most of the time, and save them badly. So the documentation for the standard, seems to be a minor step down from no documentation at all.
Two: All of this does nothing at all for backward compatability, it is a very simple matter to take an existing file, and save it as a completely different format (as evidenced by Word's ability to take a.doc or OOXML file and save it as a pdf). This might not allow other word processors to read older files, but then, they cannot do that anyway with this documentation.
If microsoft were to write real documentation for OOXML, then much of the resistance to it would fade. Admittedly, it would be a pain to impliment, but having a real standard that all word processors could use would probably be worth it.*
*At least until Microsoft makes huge sweeping undocumented changed to it.
AMD only *just* opened up their specs though (though it's a fairly fast turnaround from buying out ATI), so it'll be a little while before ATI is well supported on Linux.
A phone *is* a need. Without it I cannot get a job, or arrange for utilities, or keep my mother from showing up at my door every day. The entire reason I got one is that I needed it in order to keep a job at one point. (erratic hours, I usually only got 3 or 4 hours heads up before I needed to be at work, which meant either a cell phone, or being home or working 24/7). Now of course, I'm stuck with a sprint phone for the next year and a half.
That said, cell phones provide a very necessary competition for phone service in general, and I'[m actually able to save a substantial amount over what I would pay for a landline, by manipulating the various deals available to me. (I'm in a family share plan that's large enough I total about 15 dollars a month, and we can spread that out among multiple locations).
The great grandparent post the grandparent was responding to involved no 3rd party review though. You got a couple of them mixed up.
In my experience, issues with IT seem to reside in a single person, who is either not working at getting his staff to do their jobs right (or firing the right people, if necessary), or is actively interfering with it. Not always a PHB either.
In the particularly lovely case of the guy who heads our network (I dunno just how far up the chain this is), we have such lovely screw ups as updating Java without determining ahead of time if this would break the Java apps that the front line employees need in order to make money for the company (it did), and being too incompetent to realize that in a job that requires reading massive amount of online documentation (tech support), functions such as 'Open in new Window' are kind of essential, and should probably not be disabled. Then there's the lovely roll out we're getting in the next couple weeks, with IE7, once again, no prior indication if the tools that are specific to my floor's job will still work after this. Or for that matter, any other departments web 2.0 tools.
Governments may read and reference the source code but may not modify it. So the answer to my question, while a yes, is also that the shared source aspect is going to do very little good unless your goal is to break into a windows OS, as you would still be dependent on Microsoft to make any necessary changes.
Nor am I interested in doing my own research to defend somebody else's position, so don't tell me to RTMF right here. (RTFA would still be acceptable of course).
Except for one thing. People like that aren't worried about what they see (indeed, the watch it regularly in order to find something to complain about). Or what their kids see, because obviously, their kids would never watch such filth.
No, they complain because of what *your* kids might see.
Heh, I work support too, and I've realized there two very distinct class of people out there when it come to computing. It's not about experience, or education, or anything like that. It's about the people who, when presented with the options of 'ok' and 'cancel', never had to be told what those meant, versus those that did. (There is a third class, of those who need to be told every time, but I prefer not to think about them). and no, it's not at all unusual to find out that the person you're talking to who needs to be told to do what the instructions on screen are already telling them to do, is actually quite intelligent as long as you take their computer away.
I have to wonder, from a historical, perspective, how the hell the *Roman* senate did all this. Yes, many of the politicians of the time were rich and powerful (especially in the early, pre-empire Rome), but there were political offices where it was flat out *required* that you be a Plebian (commoner). As time progressed the upper classes steadily lost political power as well (keep in mind that poor people voted in Rome, and there were a *lot* of them.
Indeed, the fall of Roman democracy is sometimes (usually by people arguing against government handouts) attributed to people electing incompetent senators who ran on welfare platforms.
Which isn't to say that you don't have a point and all, but the Roman democratic period was pretty much the opposite of that progression, moving from very little power for the poor, towards a great deal of power.
It occurs to me that in this case, open source leads to its own problems, like trying to get code you know is insecure in a very hard to detect manner inserted into an OS. It's not practical for the common assholes who exploit Windows vulnerabilities to do, but the resources of the Chinese just might cook up something nasty to be exploited at a later date.
Of course, the DoD should be capable of it's own very sophisticated analysis of any open source code that they use, which would probably be enough to help counter this possibilty, and for that matter, any security vulnerability present. Except, of course, that the DoD never, under any circumstances, uses code that Microsoft might disapprove of. They probably don't bother to employ that kind of caliber of hackers either.
Somehow, I wonder if this isn't a glaring hole in the defensive (and possibly offensive) network of the US. We don't pout up with civilian grade anywhere else in the military, so why the hell are the computer's all Dell's running Windows?
The modern way is to get a halfway decent antivirus. (I'm not going to point any fingers, but I've removed certain antiviruses, and installed others, only to be deluged with adware/virus detects). And let it do the job. (note: I have yet to see *any* antivirus vendor actually claim more than 98% detection rating. There's a decent chance you're infected regardless of what the scanners say if you run Windows).
I don't know of any antivirus vendors that don't support anti-spyware/malware functions these days, though AVG has a seperate program for it. Most seem to be taking the opinion that these things are simply an addition category of malware to deal with. Especially as the things have advanced from questionably legal, to outright scary infectious. (I've seen explorer.exe infected as part of a NotAVirus type adware attack.)
Slashdot Mirror
Um, no. It says that it *is* correct. Show me a mathematical or logical statement where this does not hold true.
COBOL, obviously.
In all seriousness, the languages that are options are petty short. Typically when I've looked at hosting, outside of the (relatively expensive) ones that give you your own virtual server, you get to choose PHP or Perl. Possibly just PHP.
(The quoted section is subject to the terms and condition of the GNU Free Documentation License)
Total cost for a band to produce their own record (minus manufacturing costs) is about six grand, assuming they now how to edit the tracks. (I'll assume they can play the instruments too) is about 6 grand. More if nobody has a spare basement. That 6 grand gets you an entire *recording studio* these days. Sound proofing, mikes, instruments, computers and software. (This figure comes from having asked an artist I listen to).
Occam's Razor is not so much a fact or theory as an axiom. It states that for two *equal* statements the simpler one is correct.
This means that the answer to 2+2 is 4 and not 1+1+1+1 (both are true statements, the former is correct, because it is the simple one).
People grossly misapply it, and almost never use it correctly.
(I think the GP was trying to say this, but meh).
Screw hunting for drivers, most OEMs will coallate all the drivers for you on their website. But how many people even know they need chipset drivers? or that certain sound cards don't work if you don't install the modem drivers first (assuming you have one)? Then of course you have to factor in that the OEMs have to add software so that you can watch DVDs (unless you shelled out the extra money for Vista Premium). And god forbid you're on XP, and can't even get online to get the drivers until you have your network driver installed (Vista is nicer about that fortunately).
Windows is definitely *not* consumer ready in unbundled form.
The sad thing is, efficient power supplies are a really marginal cost increase compared to the whole system. (My 375 Watt 80% efficient one cost me $60, including shipping). But since every OEM in existence insists on spending the absolute minimum on power supplies, you get lousy 60% efficiency, and a lot of blown power supplies.
Just... shit.
The biggest thing I see between the expensive Cisco stuff and the cheap WRT stuff (once you flash the firmware, and thank god for the GPL, cause the original stuff sucked), is that the Cisco kit will support large gigabit networks, (And you can get older Cisco branded stuff at Linksys prices that doesn't if you shop the right channels).
Assuming you only need 100Mbit though (which is fine for lower tiered subnets), Well... there are three systems hooked up to my WRT54GL, and it's running at about 10% of capacity. I could probably squeeze a bit more out of it by turning the wireless of, but still wouldn't want to put more than 25 or so machines on it. And if those machines do anything fancy with the network, I might want to drop that even further.s-
Of course, getting attention for a blog that doesn't follow a party/pre-existing ideology is rather hard. Since you have no way to get the existing party line blogs to link to you, which I think is a big part of what the problem the book describes is. Noy only is it going to be near impossible to come across different (and not I say different, not opposing or moderate, politics is not a one dimensional equation) viewpoint, it's going to be extremely difficult to find one if you actively try.
I find myself in the market for a new graphics card, what's ATI got in the low range x16 slot type that's one of these R500 or R600 cards?
*This figure is complete BS, and used solely to indicate a point that Linus's work would have been useless without Stallman's.
Two problems with the idea that this is 'necessary for backwards computability'
.doc formats, since I can both read those most of the time, and save them badly. So the documentation for the standard, seems to be a minor step down from no documentation at all.
.doc or OOXML file and save it as a pdf). This might not allow other word processors to read older files, but then, they cannot do that anyway with this documentation.
One: The single biggest issue with OOXML is not any technical aspect, but rather the documentation, with frequently says something along the lines of 'do this the way this particular, undocumented format did it.' Which means that ultimately, nobody but MS can impliment it, *APPLE* has tried, they cannot save the files, and can read them badly, this actually puts them *behind* where OpenOffice is with the older
Two: All of this does nothing at all for backward compatability, it is a very simple matter to take an existing file, and save it as a completely different format (as evidenced by Word's ability to take a
If microsoft were to write real documentation for OOXML, then much of the resistance to it would fade. Admittedly, it would be a pain to impliment, but having a real standard that all word processors could use would probably be worth it.*
*At least until Microsoft makes huge sweeping undocumented changed to it.
AMD only *just* opened up their specs though (though it's a fairly fast turnaround from buying out ATI), so it'll be a little while before ATI is well supported on Linux.
A phone *is* a need. Without it I cannot get a job, or arrange for utilities, or keep my mother from showing up at my door every day. The entire reason I got one is that I needed it in order to keep a job at one point. (erratic hours, I usually only got 3 or 4 hours heads up before I needed to be at work, which meant either a cell phone, or being home or working 24/7). Now of course, I'm stuck with a sprint phone for the next year and a half.
That said, cell phones provide a very necessary competition for phone service in general, and I'[m actually able to save a substantial amount over what I would pay for a landline, by manipulating the various deals available to me. (I'm in a family share plan that's large enough I total about 15 dollars a month, and we can spread that out among multiple locations).
At which point I'm going to really want a new computer.
So basically, you're the perfect boss?
The great grandparent post the grandparent was responding to involved no 3rd party review though. You got a couple of them mixed up.
In my experience, issues with IT seem to reside in a single person, who is either not working at getting his staff to do their jobs right (or firing the right people, if necessary), or is actively interfering with it. Not always a PHB either.
In the particularly lovely case of the guy who heads our network (I dunno just how far up the chain this is), we have such lovely screw ups as updating Java without determining ahead of time if this would break the Java apps that the front line employees need in order to make money for the company (it did), and being too incompetent to realize that in a job that requires reading massive amount of online documentation (tech support), functions such as 'Open in new Window' are kind of essential, and should probably not be disabled. Then there's the lovely roll out we're getting in the next couple weeks, with IE7, once again, no prior indication if the tools that are specific to my floor's job will still work after this. Or for that matter, any other departments web 2.0 tools.
Nor am I interested in doing my own research to defend somebody else's position, so don't tell me to RTMF right here. (RTFA would still be acceptable of course).
Um, thats nice, but can you get Windows itself as shared source, at any price?
Except for one thing. People like that aren't worried about what they see (indeed, the watch it regularly in order to find something to complain about). Or what their kids see, because obviously, their kids would never watch such filth.
No, they complain because of what *your* kids might see.
Heh, I work support too, and I've realized there two very distinct class of people out there when it come to computing. It's not about experience, or education, or anything like that. It's about the people who, when presented with the options of 'ok' and 'cancel', never had to be told what those meant, versus those that did. (There is a third class, of those who need to be told every time, but I prefer not to think about them). and no, it's not at all unusual to find out that the person you're talking to who needs to be told to do what the instructions on screen are already telling them to do, is actually quite intelligent as long as you take their computer away.
I have to wonder, from a historical, perspective, how the hell the *Roman* senate did all this. Yes, many of the politicians of the time were rich and powerful (especially in the early, pre-empire Rome), but there were political offices where it was flat out *required* that you be a Plebian (commoner). As time progressed the upper classes steadily lost political power as well (keep in mind that poor people voted in Rome, and there were a *lot* of them.
Indeed, the fall of Roman democracy is sometimes (usually by people arguing against government handouts) attributed to people electing incompetent senators who ran on welfare platforms.
Which isn't to say that you don't have a point and all, but the Roman democratic period was pretty much the opposite of that progression, moving from very little power for the poor, towards a great deal of power.
It occurs to me that in this case, open source leads to its own problems, like trying to get code you know is insecure in a very hard to detect manner inserted into an OS. It's not practical for the common assholes who exploit Windows vulnerabilities to do, but the resources of the Chinese just might cook up something nasty to be exploited at a later date.
Of course, the DoD should be capable of it's own very sophisticated analysis of any open source code that they use, which would probably be enough to help counter this possibilty, and for that matter, any security vulnerability present. Except, of course, that the DoD never, under any circumstances, uses code that Microsoft might disapprove of. They probably don't bother to employ that kind of caliber of hackers either.
Somehow, I wonder if this isn't a glaring hole in the defensive (and possibly offensive) network of the US. We don't pout up with civilian grade anywhere else in the military, so why the hell are the computer's all Dell's running Windows?
Seriously, we tell Google they have to do all that in oder to evade taxes this way.
I want to see a corporate owned freeway system.
The modern way is to get a halfway decent antivirus. (I'm not going to point any fingers, but I've removed certain antiviruses, and installed others, only to be deluged with adware/virus detects). And let it do the job. (note: I have yet to see *any* antivirus vendor actually claim more than 98% detection rating. There's a decent chance you're infected regardless of what the scanners say if you run Windows).
I don't know of any antivirus vendors that don't support anti-spyware/malware functions these days, though AVG has a seperate program for it. Most seem to be taking the opinion that these things are simply an addition category of malware to deal with. Especially as the things have advanced from questionably legal, to outright scary infectious. (I've seen explorer.exe infected as part of a NotAVirus type adware attack.)